Update this test to reflect the new (deterministic) order in r134038.

This was part of Kaelyn's original patch that got dropped while I was
working on it, but after I ran my tests. =/ Sorry.

llvm-svn: 134039

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/clang/test/CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.argdep/p4.cpp b/clang/test/CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.argdep/p4.cpp
index fbaf85b2c06..15d86b7740c 100644
--- a/clang/test/CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.argdep/p4.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/CXX/basic/basic.lookup/basic.lookup.argdep/p4.cpp
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ namespace D {
 
 namespace C {
   class C {}; // expected-note {{candidate constructor (the implicit copy constructor) not viable: no known conversion from 'B::B' to 'const C::C &' for 1st argument}}
-  void func(C); // expected-note {{'D::func' declared here}} \
+  void func(C); // expected-note {{'C::func' declared here}} \
                 // expected-note {{passing argument to parameter here}}
   C operator+(C,C);
   D::D operator+(D::D,D::D);
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ namespace Test {
     // delaying, or argument checking before emitting diagnostics is needed to
     // avoid accepting and printing out a typo correction that proves to be
     // incorrect once argument-dependent lookup resolution has occurred.
-    func(B::B()); // expected-error {{use of undeclared identifier 'func'; did you mean 'D::func'?}} \
+    func(B::B()); // expected-error {{use of undeclared identifier 'func'; did you mean 'C::func'?}} \
                   // expected-error {{no viable conversion from 'B::B' to 'C::C'}}
     func(C::C());
     A::A() + A::A();